Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Seagoon on July 27, 2007, 04:33:07 PM
-
Just got sent the following. It helped me put my own feeling that the local PD did not adequately respond to the recent roberries at our church into better perspective. Frankly at the end, I felt ashamed of my own whining when I considered what tack the police in several other countries like Egypt take in responding to crimes like attempted murder when the victims are converts from Islam. This report was taken from Journal Chretien, it was also reported by Compass Direct News. Keep in mind that woman in question Eman Al-Sayeed is 26 and married:
Eyewitnesses said family members of Shaymaa (Eman) Muhammad al-Sayed, 26, dragged her screaming from the police station where she had been closeted. According to the eyewitnesses outside Alexandria’s Bab-Sharky police station, Al-Sayed’s relatives severely beat her in the Shatby Cemetery behind the police station.
She was then forced into a family microbus and driven off toward the district of Abeis, east of Alexandria, where her father’s knitting factory is located.
On 16 July, these same family members openly threatened to kill Al-Sayed for leaving Islam to become a Christian, after spotting her walking through a fair in Alexandria.
Local police promptly took her into " protective custody," allegedly to prevent her physical harm at the hands of her irate Muslim relatives.
But instead of protecting her, local police and State Security Investigation (SSI) officials have subjected the threatened woman to days of severe physical and emotional torture. Her maltreatment included electrical shocks, beatings and being photographed naked.
Her repeated requests to press charges against her family for attempting to kidnap and kill her were ignored.
At one point, Col. Abdel-Ghany Hamada of the Division of Public Affairs commanded four of his officers to beat her with their shoes while he interrogated her for hours about her forged Christian identity papers.
After becoming a Christian in January 2003, Al-Sayed had obtained Christian identity papers under the name of Maryan Eleya Saleeb and married a Christian man. Egyptian law does not permit anyone born a Muslim to change his or her religion, nor can a Muslim woman marry a Christian.
On Saturday (21 July), Al-Sayed was transferred to Cairo, assumedly to be arraigned on forgery charges before the Division of Public Affairs.
But after being shuttled around Cairo from an SSI headquarters to a holding cell of the Division of Public Affairs and then to the Al-Mosky police station, Al-Sayed was sent without explanation back to Alexandria.
On Monday (23 July), authorities then transferred her from the Bab-Sharky police station to the SSI headquarters in Al-Faraana, where Lt. Col. Issam Shawki and Lt. Col. Adel Nafie continued to issue dangerous threats to her. About the same time, Lt. Col. Waleed Fayyed of the Bab-Sharky police station sent word to Al-Sayed’s father, uncle and brother to come and take custody of her from the police station.
Although fully aware of the family’s threats to kill Al-Sayed, the police failed to require her family to sign any guarantee that she would not be harmed. Despite the young woman’s legal adult status, she was unable to obtain any restraining order to secure her personal safety.
After El-Sayed’s family learned of her conversion to Christianity in January 2003, they had severely abused her as they were determined to force her to return to Islam and marry a cousin active in the Al-Salafiyeen extremist movement.
Since she fled home four years ago, her father has reportedly filed three missing person’s reports with the police in attempts to track her down.
"But she is not a minor, she is an adult," Egyptian Christian advocate Rasha Noor told Compass today. "Why did the authorities give her over to her family, when they know that her relatives want to kill her ?"
-
I am assuming the point is to be glad I don't live in Egypt. Point taken.
In fact, living anywhere that superstitious beliefs and Draconian intolerance is made law would be a real downer to put it mildly.
-
Seagoon,
I spent a summer in Egypt studying ancient history and modern Egyptian culture at the American University in Cairo.
While it is not against the law to practice the Christian faith, there are several restrictions on the country's Christian population.
They cannot openly proselytze people of the Muslim faith, but Muslims may proselytze them.
They can convert to Islam but it is against the law to renounce their conversion.
No Christian temple may be as large as the largest Muslim mosque.
Christian missionaries are prohibited.
Radical Muslims often persecute Christians, and sometimes murder them, although moderate Muslims reject such actions.
Many of Egypt's ancient monuments have had the images of their gods defaced. When questioned about this, Muslim scholars always blame it on early Christian activity, in spite of the fact that Muslims do today and have in the past defaced images of the gods of other religions, including those of Christ in Christian parks.
Despite such obvious persecution, which has been going on for centuries, ten percent of Egypt's population remains steadfastly Christian.
Regards, Shuckins
-
Muslims can not co-exist with anyone else, there is only one solution.
-
Seagoon,
I respect you and your beliefs, but this is what happens when any religion is given priority over law and human rights. Christians are responsable many attrocities in the "name of God". It really doesn't matter what brand of religion people practice, it's the quanity. Moderation is the key.
John9001 illustrates my point.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Seagoon,
I respect you and your beliefs, but this is what happens when any religion is given priority over law and human rights. Christians are responsable many attrocities in the "name of God". It really doesn't matter what brand of religion people practice, it's the quanity. Moderation is the key.
John9001 illustrates my point.
So RPM do you have an example of a Christian country, with laws against converting to other religions and where a family will beat and maybe murder a close family member for their beliefs? Or are you just spouting the typical PC all religions are equally bad BS?
If you do find one, has anything like that taken place recently? Say in the past 50 years?
I am firmly agnostic with a strong leaning towards their being no god, but I don't KNOW so I wont claim to be an atheist since you can't prove to there is not a god.
I know a ton of Christians, some pretty hard core, and I don't know a single one who would ever consider harming a family member or anyone else over religion, so statements like yours always ring with the BS PC bell sound.
I won't go so far as to say all Muslims are like this, not even most, but a hell of a lot more then Christians.
Don't bother with the typical IRA and abortion bomber tripe, since they are not harming direct family members and most Abortion bombings didn't involve murder they don't address my question.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
So RPM do you have an example of a Christian country, with laws against converting to other religions and where a family will beat and maybe murder a close family member for their beliefs? Or are you just spouting the typical PC all religions are equally bad BS?
If you do find one, has anything like that taken place recently? Say in the past 50 years?
I never put a timeframe on religious fanatisim. Because religion does not update with time.
Those that do are branded heretics, i.e. mormons, protestants.
Some examples of Christian fanatisim:
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquistion.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v228/displacedtexan/blandishment/Monty_Python_Spanish_Inquisition.jpg)
or the Salem witchhunts
(http://www.hypatia-trust.org.uk/images/Salem1.jpg)
or even more recently, Ireland
(http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/terror_96/photo3.gif)
and our dear old O'Club
as originally posted by John9001
Muslims can not co-exist with anyone else, there is only one solution.
I'm pretty sure he's not talking about prayer and meditation.
As I said before it's not the brand, it's the quanity of the religion.
-
RPM of course you won't put a time limit on it because then you would be wrong.
Ireland was not about religion really but if thats the best you got, then show me where family members murdered or beat other family members simply because they converted to the other sides religion.
Do you really live in fear that this countries Christians are going to rise up and do witch burnings again?
If so can you share what your smoking?
;)
And religions do reform themselves, Islam hasnt but I am pretty sure Christianity has several times. Seagoon prolly could cover that better then I could though so I won't try.
As I said before it's not the brand, it's the quantity of the religion.
I don't think this is not right but is close, its not the brand but how it is taught. IE Christianity isn't a threat in the least now because no one is teaching them to blow **** up with suicide belts and telling them it will get them to heaven, though, I do not think any well of western Christians could be taught how to do this at all, since no where in the bible I can find does it advocate direct suicide in the name of the lord being a good thing. . Granted I have not touched a bible since I got kicked out of Christian school.
Also most Christians I know are far more concerned with the next American idol season then with their pastors concerns
Religions are not black and white, there are degrees to how bad or good there effect is on the world, I think Islam overall is by far worse.
John9001 is a troll first and foremost, and I am not sure if he is a christian, but even so, if he is, John, would you beat your children for going mormon if you are indeed Christian?
-
Hello RPM,
Originally posted by rpm
Seagoon,
I respect you and your beliefs, but this is what happens when any religion is given priority over law and human rights. Christians are responsable many attrocities in the "name of God". It really doesn't matter what brand of religion people practice, it's the quanity. Moderation is the key.
John9001 illustrates my point.
Before I get to my point, please allow me to say that I'm grateful for your respect, I truly am. I hope you know in turn that I appreciate the O'Club and its members immensely and that my desire will ever be for your good here and hereafter.
Anyway, I could camp out on points like the fact that the IRA never declared itself to be a Christian organization in its charter, or to be fighting for Roman Catholicism, how the Salem Witch trials lasted one year and resulted in the executions of at most 20 people, and so on or point out the relative antiquity of these events compared to the event I posted above and the way it is only one tiny drop of the awful misery produced by Sharia law throughout the world today. Experience though shows that none of this is compelling. It is part and parcel of an odd reaction present throughout the west. Namely that when contemporary acts of unspeakable violence are perpetrated in the name of Islam, immediately we jump to defend Islam and condemn Christianity as just as bad if not worse. One can even document the fact that the founder of Islam and his followers were incredibly violent, and contrast that with the peaceful behavior and teaching of Christ and the early Christians and yet it doesn't seem to have any impact.
Well alright then, let me try a different tack. I'm no moderate Christian, I am quite fanatical in my Christianity, I am eager to produce an equal if not greater zeal for Christ and the Christian faith in other people, and I have devoted my life to teaching and practicing the faith taught in the Bible. Many of my friends in the ministry are the same way. They are so fanatical about Christ, they are willing, for instance, to fly to Tsunami ravaged areas of Thailand and spend weeks helping to find and dispose of putrefying corpses, and feeding and clothing refugees, or conclude peace treaties with warring African clans, or sneak into southern Sudan to actually help the people we hear the candidates merely offering platitudes about and so on, all in the name of Christ (I know men who've actually done all these things). Now admittedly I'm not doing nearly as much as many of my friends, when I get really stirred up for Christ all I do are crazy things like counsel people whose marriages are falling apart or talk to drug addicts, or visit the sick, or offer the hope of the gospel to the grieving, or just hand out tracts or preach a sermon or two.
Now, can you explain to me how this fanaticism and the fanaticism of the family of Eman Al-Sayeed are equally bad? It's not going to happen, but if there was suddenly a country that developed the same kind of Christian fanaticism that I've caught, do you really think it would look even remotely like Egypt or Afghanistan?
- SEAGOON
-
Sea,
I am sure people will come back and tell you that of course a religious state run by Christians would be just as evil.
its the same lack of login that the anti gun types fall into, they decide guns or God are evil and stop thinking about the issue.
Guns or god do not make people commit evil acts. Evil is a part of man, man blames everything but the real culprit for it. MAN.
It does pose an interesting question.
I do not think a Christian nation would go around attacking family members over something like mentioned above but how would it treat people like gays who are un repetitive sinners?
I honestly do not know, if you base it on the model of the Church running the show completely you have allot of evidence that man would screw it up and make it just as evil in other ways. A certain type of man wants to be in control of others, they end up in politics, when religion and politics meet you end up with these men, some evil, running things in the name of god, thats a bad combo. I honestly would not want to live in such a place.
I think our founding fathers got it right, no state religion. Though I agree with you that it is being taken to far. People with the no religion in the public sqaure clearing miss the point of the 1st. Religious leaders have as much right to the public sqaure as the commie protesters or gay rights parades. Allowing the to push their ideals in the public square is what is not supposed to be infringed on. The government just cant push one religion over the other and can not adopt any religion.
If I had a choice between christian fanatics and Muslim fanatics as neighbors, I would chose the Christians every time. I know for a fact they wouldnt murder me for saying something like **** Jesus. They may dislike me for it, but I wouldnt be worried about being attacked or killed.
I can't say the same thing about Muslims.
What about you RPM, given the two choices who would you chose?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Ireland was not about religion really ?
Oh yes it was, and still is
-
I do not think a Christian nation would go around attacking family members over something like mentioned above but how would it treat people like gays who are un repetitive sinners?
I can answer this one. :D
If the Christian leaders actually followed the things that Christ taught, gays would not be persecuted. The Bible tells us to love thy neighbor as thyself and judge not lest ye be judged. The Bible commands us to love our neighbors and to not judge them.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Seagoon,
I respect you and your beliefs, but this is what happens when any religion is given priority over law and human rights. Christians are responsable many attrocities in the "name of God". It really doesn't matter what brand of religion people practice, it's the quanity. Moderation is the key.
John9001 illustrates my point.
rpm= extremist apologist.
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
rpm= extremist apologist.
One of the dumbest statements ever.
-
Religion aside I think there's a different and to some degree a more fundamental aspect that bewilders us here in the "west". It's evolution over stagnation.
You'll have to forgive my simplistic terms in the following theory. I'm not academic and I certainly don't have an in depth knowledge.
When you look at human history we are reminded of the Greeks, Romans, persians and so on. We are also reminded of philosophers, astronomers, mathematicians and so on. All have played an important role in humanities building blocks here in the "civilized" world.
Humanity has gone through several stages like that of a real person. Infancy, childhood, adolescence to all most adult hood. You can relate these aspects in time scales of mankind as it has evolved.
I see the present "west" as being on the brink of adult hood. Where as other parts of our planet are still stuck in the dark ages or medieval periods. Infancy and childhood respectively.
The present "west" has done or did things 400 to 500 years ago that places like middle east are just going through now. The problem is exacerbated because we're selling them AK's and other technology that's out of the time scale for the mentality. Could you imagine King Henry the Eighth with AK's when reforming the church? Hold that thought a moment. Could you imagine the catholics with AK's meeting the reformers ? Here's another thought for you. Could you imagine a Japanese Emperor who is a God ? Time scales man!
Some time ago religion in the "west" was put firmly in second place where ruling a nation was concerned. Unfortunately these back arsed nations as I like to call them just ain't evolved yet. They haven't gotten to the stage in humanity where religion is seen to be put in it's place.
Now don't take me wrong. I'm not saying religion of what ever kind is bad. What I'm saying is it has a place but that place not the "be all end all".
There's a medieval mind set out there and it needs to evolve.
Then again I could be an illiterate geezer talking bar room bollocks.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
John9001 is a troll first and foremost, and I am not sure if he is a christian, but even so, if he is, John, would you beat your children for going mormon if you are indeed Christian?
i would not beat my childern, they could follow any religion or non, that's for them to decide.
-
rpm... what a crock... you are asked for examples and you point to a time in the dark ages when every crime no matter what..religion or not.. was pretty much punished with torture or death or both.. from stealing a loaf a bread to killing a deer on the kings land to... blashemy.
They/we were a brutal people across the planet. religion was just another way to put a "reason" for the normal brutality of the times. Pretty much... any excuse to torture and kill and maim was good enough for our ancestors.
So I ask you this....
If there were millions of christians that had that "old time religion" of torture and death... if there were thousand upon thousands willing to die to spred it..
Would you say it was ok cause there were muslims like it? That "all religions" were like that?
Or.. would it be worth it to you to wipe out the most fanatical of that ficticious christian group?
lazs
-
Lazs, I made a statement...
...this is what happens when any religion is given priority over law and human rights.
I did not say what, when or where the religion was practiced. You want to modify my statement then make a commentary. That would be like me taking a 2nd amendment quote of yours out of context and make you defend it. BTW, I don't see any right to own a gun in the Bible. It says you can own swords, but no mention of guns.
Religion, including Christianity, has been the cause of many wars and attrocities thruout history. When you place religion above the law of the land, you're going to have problems. Fortunately most christians are peaceful law-abiding citizens, but some are fanatic extremists like David Koresh & Jim Jones. It happens in almost every religion. Moderation is still the key.
Seagoon, I don't think I could ever imagine you taking your religious beliefs to the level of the family of Eman Al-Sayeed. But I also would'nt imagine you to ignore the law of the land. You use moderation. You may feel a law is unchristian, but I'm pretty sure you would still obey the law until you could get it overturned or repealed. Even as a man of the cloth you know that moderation is important.
If we threw out the constitution and replaced it with the Bible and only followed 1 strict interpretation of it America would become a very ugly place to live. Religion has it's place in society, but laws are more important.
-
It's hardly just religions rpm. Give anyone control over anyone else and our selfish natures become evident.
-
I agree Iron.
-
17 Christians Convicted in Indonesia
By IRWAN FIRDAUS
The Associated Press
Thursday, July 26, 2007; 9:43 AM
JAKARTA, Indonesia -- A dozen Christian men were convicted Thursday and sentenced to up to 14 years in jail for beating to death and beheading two Muslims to avenge the government executions of three Christians in Indonesia last year.
Five other Christians received eight-year terms for burying the pair, who were set upon by a mob as they drove though a Christian neighborhood on Sulawesi island a day after the Sept. 22, 2006, executions of Fabianus Tibo and two other Christian militants.
The three executed Christians had been found guilty of leading a militia that killed at least 70 Muslims during a 1999-2002 religious war on the island that led to the deaths of at least 1,000 people from both faiths.
Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/26/AR2007072600722.html?nav=hcmodule)
-
but some are fanatic extremists like David Koresh & Jim Jones.
Niether of them were Christians.
-
Originally posted by john9001
Muslims can not co-exist with anyone else, there is only one solution.
If that's the case, ask George Bush why he wants Congress to approve an Arms sell that would give Egypt among other middle eastern countries US military weapons.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aH4QgFii6qwI&refer=us
-
and rolex, don't forget the christian imperial armies in Afghanistan that are daily killing the peaceful Taliban.
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by crockett
If that's the case, ask George Bush why he wants Congress to approve an Arms sell that would give Egypt among other middle eastern countries US military weapons.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aH4QgFii6qwI&refer=us
you ask him, i'm too busy trying to reduce my carbon footprint.
-
Religion of peace:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/26/AR2007072600722.html?nav=hcmodule
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Niether of them were Christians.
(http://www.junkscience.com/JSJ_Course/jsjudocourse/wrong.jpg)
-
Momma says :
"Religion is the devil Bobby Bouche"
(http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/Dablues/thwaterboy.jpg)
-
rpm, Jim Jones did not believe in the Bible in it's entirety and believed that he himself was an anointed prophet. He believed many things that were contrary to Biblical teachings. He cherry picked things from the Bible that suited him and discarded others that did not suit him.
David Koresh believed that he himself was the Messiah (even changed his name to reflect this), he was also a pedophile.
Both men used the Bible to further their own agendas, neither did they preach the Gospel or that all men are sinners.
Just because one preaches from a pulpit does not make one a Christian.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Religion of peace:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/26/AR2007072600722.html?nav=hcmodule
Well I guess that shoots my theory down, guess it won't be much of a consolation prise for the victims that their murderes will prolly burn in hell if there is a good.
-
So they were Muslim, no wait Islam, no wait... (scurring to think of any other hated religion)
Jones and Koresh were both Christian and perfect examples of religion taken too far.
Sorry to poop in your ricebowl.
-
As I noted, the daily evil produced by Islamic doctrine produces an even more baffling response in the West; either 1) All Religions are evil, or more commonly 2) Christianity is Evil.
The obvious logical conclusion Islam is evil is instantly rejected, and anyone who dares to suggest it (as Franklin Graham had the temerity to do) is met with loud denunciations that they are only saying that because they are bigots and that this violates the long-established "Christianity is the only religion that may be publicly attacked and called evil" rule (this rule is occasionally bent, because someone has to say something about scientology.)
The fact that #1 is demonstrably false, and logically absurd (using that kind of reasoning I could immediately condemn the Democratic Party as Evil because Fascism is also a political movement and evil actions on the part of one political movement prove that all political movements are evil) doesn't seem to phase anyone. What atrocities have the Amish committed of late pray tell? For that matter, when have members of my own denomination beaten up, imprisoned, shocked, or beheaded anyone in the name of Jesus?
As for #2, its a sleight of hand. Instead of having to account for the fact that everywhere we find Islam in contact with other religions and worldviews, we find Jihad and oppression, we kick the Christians. To do so we have to employ ridiculously disproportionate comparisons. For instance, two evil maniacs who entirely departed from orthodox Christian doctrine and who both called themselves the Messiah and demanded to worshipped and slavishly submitted to by their followers are somehow the equivalent of institutionalized Sharia laws enforced in several Muslim countries that allow anyone attempting to leave Islam to be either put to death, imprisoned, or tortured. Or that the thousands of people who are killed every year in the name of Allah and in keeping with the teaching of the Quran, Hadiths, Sharia, and numerous Fatwas, because of the unspeakable crime of not submitting to Islam is not a problem, because three catholics in Sulawesi killed two Muslims after the Jemaah Islamiyah Jihadis who beheaded three Christian schoolgirls (in addition to confessing to the shooting of Christian lawyer Ferry Silalahi; involvement in the shooting of the Rev. Susianty Tinulele; the bombing of Immanuel church; and the beheading of a Christian village chief in Poso - and those are just the things we know about.) were given light sentences by a Muslim judge. Heck in Indonesia, being a Sunday school teacher can get you three years in jail, but no, somehow a vigilante killing which goes against Christian doctrine makes what is done by Muslims following the example of Muhammad "ok."
Somehow I think that if 10% of Christians were in favor of, or actively waging a bloody worldwide holy war to establish a Christian Caliphate by force, we wouldn't be able to get a pass quite so easily. But apparently the total lack of a Christian version of the multinational terror organizations like those under the Muslim Brotherhood banner (such as Al Qaeda) and the lack of a Christian Jihad isn't compelling, neither apparently is the fact that for every atrocity committed by someone claiming to be Christian, we can point to massive Christian organizations actively about the work of worldwide charity and good deeds. In fact, worldwide Christian charity dwarfs all other comers in that field. By contrast, Islamic organizations and effort dedicated to Jihad dwarf Islamic charity, and what Islamic relief efforts exist almost exclusively focus on the Dar-El-Islam (and as several trials in the west have shown, many Islamic "charities" funnel money to the Jihad). So when there is a Tsunami in Indonesia, Christians come pouring in to help. But the Islamic charities reaction to a Hurricane in South or North America? Barely a yawn.
The situation would strike me as absurd, but it doesn't, I expect it. Its tied in to a larger problem with the hearts of men and what Christ consequently told His followers to expect in John 15:18-20.
- SEAGOON
-
Please forgive my butting in but when I hear something such as religion is to blame for all that is bad in the world, well... I believe religion gets the bad end of the stick when it comes to being blamed for war and everything that is bad. All it takes for religion to be taken to task is for some megalomaniac dictator to commit evil and be identified/associated with religion. It does not make sense (to me) that the evil could be inspired by religion. It does make sense that the evil could be inspired by greed, lust for power, world domination, etc., etc., etc. - all worldly pursuits.
Religion is a code of conduct for a civilized society. That is why our founding fathers encouraged religion from the beginning, and for a very practical reason by the way. The young nation had limited resources and the founders figured if people were religious there would be less crime as a whole and hence, not an expedient need for a large police force. Why would they think that way if religion was not the cornerstone of a civilized society? Not as much crime? Folks cooperating with each other to build a nation? Freedom of religion without fear of persecution?
Nope, it ain't religion that starts wars or foments evil so much as secular worldly interests on the part of either governments or dictatorships.
Les
-
Going back to a relevent topic in this post showing some "Christian" wars, the Irish/Scottish wars against England, I have something for you to swallow. England was not acting Christianly (maybe a new word?), very much different. The King had then stated that he, not the Pope, (and in his mind, probably not Jesus either, he was only out for more power) was head of the Church. The Irish and Scottish did not follow him, and beleived that the Pope was the head of the Church. This, of course, made the King angry (becuase he lost that much power), so he persecuted the Scotts and Irishmen and sent in his army after them. The Scotts and Irish were often badly beaten, killed, jailed, and persecuted relentlessly. Many of them hid, some fought, but all it boiled down to was that they were fightly justly against a monarch who thought he was the next Messiah, and that he controlled Church beliefs. Religions aren't all evil, the people that use them to obtain more power are. And they usually can't be characterized as belonging to the religion they use.
-
Originally posted by rpm
So they were Muslim, no wait Islam, no wait... (scurring to think of any other hated religion)
Jones and Koresh were both Christian and perfect examples of religion taken too far.
Sorry to poop in your ricebowl.
They were pretenders, that identified themselves with Christianity to further their own sick agendas. Just because they identified themselves with Christianity does not make either one a Christian. If you actually understood the Christian faith, you would understand what I am talking about. But you don't understand, so you will continue to call those two pretenders Christians.
Jones and Koresh didn't take Christianity to far, they perverted the Christian faith for their own agendas. Any pastor that has a daily, personal relationship with Christ would not be capable of what these two did imo.
What they did was wrong and inexcusable. They purposely fed their followers lies and half-truths for their own personal benefit. Again, that's not something a Christian pastor would do.
Seagoon is a good example of a Christian pastor. Can you honestly compare Jones and Koresh to Seagoon? I would hope you can see the difference, I certainly can.
-
Seagoon I pray that one day I might be able to communicate my thoughts and beliefs half as well as you do yours. /sigh
-
Elfie, I'm not saying they were good christians, but that christianity is the brand of religion they were marketing. I'm not down on christianity, I'm just saying it is not immune from abuse simply because of it's deity. It's a big fluff'n planet, folks...
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Religion of peace:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/26/AR2007072600722.html?nav=hcmodule
What happened in Indonesia goes against Christian doctrine. No man is perfect and it doesn't matter what religion he follows. In the end, God will judge each of us according to our actions, including these men. In the mean time, they are all in jail, as they should be.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
In the end, God will judge each of us according to our actions...
That, my friend, is the bottom line.
-
christianity is the brand of religion they were marketing.
Yes they did identify with Christianity, that is not in dispute at all.
I think it's important for each Christian to know basic biblical doctrine. Obviously the followers of Koresh and Jones did NOT know basic biblical doctrine and hence they were duped by a couple of pretenders. The followers of these two pretenders could have easily disputed what they were being taught simply by reading the bible for themselves imo.
I'm just saying it is not immune from abuse simply because of it's deity.
It certainly isn't immune from abuse, but what institution on the planet is? Certainly not any of the various religions, nor any form of government, nor any position of authority. The problem doesn't lie with the religion, government or position of authority, it lies within those individuals that abuse their positions for more power, ego or whatever. (Generally speaking)
An obvious exception would be Islam teaching violence is acceptable in the name of Allah. We can probably find exceptions for all those categories as well. You know the saying....there is an exception to every rule. ;)
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Yes they did identify with Christianity, that is not in dispute at all.
It certainly isn't immune from abuse, but what institution on the planet is?
That is my point.
-
The pitiful victim in this case got nothing that the extremists (http://www.conservapedia.com/Christian_Reconstructionism) who lurk within Seagoon's own sect wouldn't like to inflict on every adulterer, apostate, idolator, blasphemer, homosexual, non-believer and every other person who transgresses against their own particularly old-testament style worldview.
For every Qutb there's a Rushdoony eh Seagoon?
-
Seagoon is Presbyterian, not a Reconstructionist. :)
Again, we have an example (in your link) of individuals who are either ignorant or disregard basic Biblical doctrine. Christ released us from the Law of the Old Testament. That doesn't mean that things the Old Testament calls sin are no longer sin. We are now in the Age of Grace where Christ's sacrifice has already paid the penalty for our sin.
-
Hello Momus,
Good to hear from you again.
Originally posted by Momus--
The pitiful victim in this case got nothing that the extremists (http://www.conservapedia.com/Christian_Reconstructionism) who lurk within Seagoon's own sect wouldn't like to inflict on every adulterer, apostate, idolator, blasphemer, homosexual, non-believer and every other person who transgresses against their own particularly old-testament style worldview.
For every Qutb there's a Rushdoony eh Seagoon?
An interesting attempt at a parallel, but respectfully it really doesn't really come close to matching up.
Theonomy and/or Reconstructionism do not even represent a sizable minority within the Christian faith, in fact far less than 1% of all Christians world-wide adhere to theonomic doctrine. The denominations that subscribe to Theonomy are literally tiny, the largest one that I am aware of consists of 11 churches that average 90 or less members each.
My own denomination, on a number of occasions has officially repudiated Theonomic teaching, and several churches and ministers have left as a result. Here is the official PCA General Assembly position on the penal sanctions of the Judicial Law that you referred to:
QUESTION 5: 'Are the penal sanctions of the judicial laws of the Old Testament, such as those found in Deuteronomy 13, part of the general equity and, therefore, are they to be applied today as they were to the State of Israel, assuming the government as a righteous government according to the truth of God?'
ANSWER: All laws of the Old Testament were equitable for the era for which they were designed. But great care must be taken to determine precisely how they apply to the present era. In the case of Deuteronomy 13, in which the state is directed to execute any individual who attempts in private to lead someone to worship another god, and to annihilate all members of a community that worship another god, it is the interpretation of the Eleventh General Assembly that the legislation applies to the distinctive era in which Israel was established by specific divine revelation as His theocratic nation, and should not be enforced by the state in the present era.
Additionally, the constitution of our denomination contains statements that simply cannot be reconciled with Theonomy, among them:
Since ecclesiastical discipline must be purely moral or spiritual in
its object, and not attended with any civil effects, it can derive no
force whatever, but from its own justice, the approbation of an
impartial public, and the countenance and blessing of the great
Head of the Church [Jesus Christ]
...
3-4. The power of the Church is exclusively spiritual; that of the State
includes the exercise of force. The constitution of the Church derives from
divine revelation; the constitution of the State must be determined by human
reason and the course of providential events. The Church has no right to
construct or modify a government for the State, and the State has no right to
frame a creed or polity for the Church. They are as planets moving in
concentric orbits: "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to
God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:21)
You will also find anti-theonomic essays on my own congregation's website.
But regardless, what terrorist organizations embrace Christian Reconstructionism? What beheadings, assassinations or IED attacks have been committed by Reconstructionists? What government anywhere embraces Reconstructionism? The answer to all of these questions is none.
Additionally, the heaviest attacks on the Reconstructionist worldview come from within the church, this is marked contrast to the silence or outright approval within the Islamic world for the prosecution of Jihad, calls for the death of Salman Rushdie, rioting over cartoons and so on.
In contrast to the teeny weeny groups of Christian and pseudo-Christian extremists, who are under fairly constant attack by the Christian community, finding entire nations that embrace and prosecute the laws of Sharia throughout the Islamic world is laughably easy. Videos of adulteresses being shot or stoned on the internet and institutional atrocities like the one I cited in the first post are a dime a dozen and Sharia is at the heart of Islam, not the fringe.
Momus, can you explain to me how Sharia is of benefit to the world, how violence and assassination weren't part and parcel of Islam as it was practiced by Muhammad, and so on.
Rushdoony clearly didn't practice Christianity the way Christ and his apostles did, but Qutb clearly practiced Islam the same way Muhammad and his Holy Warriors did.
- SEAGOON
-
Hi McFarland,
Originally posted by McFarland
Going back to a relevent topic in this post showing some "Christian" wars, the Irish/Scottish wars against England, I have something for you to swallow. England was not acting Christianly (maybe a new word?), very much different. The King had then stated that he, not the Pope, (and in his mind, probably not Jesus either, he was only out for more power) was head of the Church. The Irish and Scottish did not follow him, and beleived that the Pope was the head of the Church.
I hope you don't mind if I make a small historical correction. While the Irish Catholics did/do indeed believe that the Pope is the head of the church on earth, and the Church of England confessed that the king was the head of the church, the Scottish and Northern Irish Presbyterian majority got into trouble because they confessed that the church had "no King but Jesus" - they were equally adamant that the Pope was not the head of the church.
I wrote a short and inadequate history of the conflict between the King and the Scottish Covenanters in another thread:
...Great Britain had what is referred to as an established church in other words, the Church of England (or Anglican Church) was the official church of the Kingdom and they held (and still hold) that the King was the head of the church - a position that many Scottish Presbyterians held to be blasphemous as only Christ could be head of the church. This led to great persecution in Scotland as the English attempted to remove Presbyterianism and establish the Church of England there during the 17th century as well. The period from the 1660s to 1688 in Scotland was known by Scots Presbyterians as "the Killing Times" as the King's dragoons hunted down and killed and imprisoned many of the Covenanters who refused to take a loyalty oath which declared that the King was the head of the church. Many Scots during this period fled first to Ulster and then the American Colonies, bringing their hearty detestation for the established church of England.
For a more detailed examination of the issues, check out the following Wikki article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenanter
- SEAGOON
-
Ay, thanks for clarifying that for me. I didn't think the Scotts were Catholic and thought the Pope was the head, but I wasn't 100% sure. I knew that both they and the Irish were under prosection from England for their religious belief that the king wasn't the head of the Church.